By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - When will an improved switch-hardware be released ?

 

When will an improved switch-hardware be released?

End of 2019, I think so too. 16 25.40%
 
2020! 22 34.92%
 
2021. 11 17.46%
 
Maybe.. (other year or theory) 7 11.11%
 
nintendo will only develo... 4 6.35%
 
see results 3 4.76%
 
Total:63
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Miyamotoo said:

Why no way? Switch is like hybrid actually has much more potential for difrent type of revisions than 3DS, not to mention Wii. Wii was home console, Switch has handheld hardware so of course it will have different type of revisions and you can bet that low price point option will be one of them and that we want wait end of Switch life for something like that.

Pretty much every other post I've made in this thread answers that, including one you quoted before, so just read through them if ya care enough. I'd rather not turn into a broken record.

I thought you had some some single reason or good/strong points for such a thinking, but if you alaredy wrote those points and I already reply to you, than just ignore my previous post.



Around the Network

I'd say 2021

With the hardware flaws in the Tegra chips I'm sure Nintendo asks NVidia to iron these out first, and as a result should recieve a true custom Tegra chip

My expectation is somewhere around this:

TSMC 7nm process (Nintendo tends to use an older, proven process and hardware, by that time 7nm and what I write below hopefully fits that bill to them)
4-6 Cortex A75 CPU @ 1.5-1.7 Ghz
384 Turing Cuda Cores @400 (Handheld)-800Ghz (Docked) or 256 Pascal Cuda Cores @600-1200Ghz
8GB LPDDR4-2666, 128bit connection (the LP variant isn't specified higher than that, sadly)
128GB Flash Memory
5000-6000 mAh internal battery

In 7nm, a configuration close to that should get close to XBO S power in docked mode and slightly more powerful in handheld mode than the docked mode now without consuming more, and the stronger battery allows for longer game sessions in handheld mode.



Bofferbrauer2 said:
I'd say 2021

With the hardware flaws in the Tegra chips I'm sure Nintendo asks NVidia to iron these out first, and as a result should recieve a true custom Tegra chip

My expectation is somewhere around this:

TSMC 7nm process (Nintendo tends to use an older, proven process and hardware, by that time 7nm and what I write below hopefully fits that bill to them)
4-6 Cortex A75 CPU @ 1.5-1.7 Ghz
384 Turing Cuda Cores @400 (Handheld)-800Ghz (Docked) or 256 Pascal Cuda Cores @600-1200Ghz
8GB LPDDR4-2666, 128bit connection (the LP variant isn't specified higher than that, sadly)
128GB Flash Memory
5000-6000 mAh internal battery

In 7nm, a configuration close to that should get close to XBO S power in docked mode and slightly more powerful in handheld mode than the docked mode now without consuming more, and the stronger battery allows for longer game sessions in handheld mode.

You still think about 2021!? :D

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237891&page=1#

 

2021. was way too late even before this rumour, buy 2021. we will have several Switch difrent type revision, for instance Switch Mini/Pocket and Switch Pro.



Miyamotoo said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:
I'd say 2021

With the hardware flaws in the Tegra chips I'm sure Nintendo asks NVidia to iron these out first, and as a result should recieve a true custom Tegra chip

My expectation is somewhere around this:

TSMC 7nm process (Nintendo tends to use an older, proven process and hardware, by that time 7nm and what I write below hopefully fits that bill to them)
4-6 Cortex A75 CPU @ 1.5-1.7 Ghz
384 Turing Cuda Cores @400 (Handheld)-800Ghz (Docked) or 256 Pascal Cuda Cores @600-1200Ghz
8GB LPDDR4-2666, 128bit connection (the LP variant isn't specified higher than that, sadly)
128GB Flash Memory
5000-6000 mAh internal battery

In 7nm, a configuration close to that should get close to XBO S power in docked mode and slightly more powerful in handheld mode than the docked mode now without consuming more, and the stronger battery allows for longer game sessions in handheld mode.

You still think about 2021!? :D

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237891&page=1#

 

2021. was way too late even before this rumour, buy 2021. we will have several Switch difrent type revision, for instance Switch Mini/Pocket and Switch Pro.

I know about the report, but a) It's the Wall Street Journal, who has been very wrong in the past when talking about videogame industry, and b) because I don't expect that to have upgraded processing power.

@bolded: for a mini, pro or pocket Switch, all need the same upgrade, otherwise the mini/pocket models run out of power after just one hour of gaming. In fact, those will probably come with the "pro" hardware, but clocked down to "base" processing capabilities to save additional power for them to be able several hours on less battery.

Sure, an Tegra X2 could do the trick, but considering the inherent massive flaws in the chips (just google Spectre and Meltdown) I'm damn sure Nintendo will want new hardware with those flaws eliminated, something that takes a lot of time to implement. Late 2020 is therefore the earliest possible unless Nintendo really accepts the X2 "as is" for a Switch hardware upgrade



Bofferbrauer2 said:
Miyamotoo said:

You still think about 2021!? :D

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237891&page=1#

 

2021. was way too late even before this rumour, buy 2021. we will have several Switch difrent type revision, for instance Switch Mini/Pocket and Switch Pro.

I know about the report, but a) It's the Wall Street Journal, who has been very wrong in the past when talking about videogame industry, and b) because I don't expect that to have upgraded processing power.

@bolded: for a mini, pro or pocket Switch, all need the same upgrade, otherwise the mini/pocket models run out of power after just one hour of gaming. In fact, those will probably come with the "pro" hardware, but clocked down to "base" processing capabilities to save additional power for them to be able several hours on less battery.

Sure, an Tegra X2 could do the trick, but considering the inherent massive flaws in the chips (just google Spectre and Meltdown) I'm damn sure Nintendo will want new hardware with those flaws eliminated, something that takes a lot of time to implement. Late 2020 is therefore the earliest possible unless Nintendo really accepts the X2 "as is" for a Switch hardware upgrade

I also don't expect necessary upgraded power, but Nintendo handhelds always had revision 2 years after launch, so 2019. was expected for revision even before this WSJ report.

Switch Mini/Pocket can be done even with current specs and whithout any upgrade, we talking about smaller screen and probably more power saving screen.



Around the Network
Lonely_Dolphin said:
To be fair, no one has to do anything, so why have this discussion?

Because we can.

Lonely_Dolphin said:
For Nintendo to remain in business they have to do things.

Correct.

Lonely_Dolphin said:
Greatly dropping the Switch's price mid-cycle at the expense of desired features while there's already a cheap option in 3DS I don't think is one of those things.

The 3DS is archaic, it's on the way out. In a few years it will be an irrelevant platform if it isn't already. (I don't really keep an eye on sales.)

Nintendo needs variants of the Switch to hit multiple price points to appeal to more consumers, sell more games and services.

 

flashfire926 said:
If there are any tech guys here, I have a question.

Will a Switch Revision, with a Nvidia Tegra X2, with 64 or 128 gb flash storage, be feasible for Early 2019, at a price of $299?

Yes. Could be argued that it is feasible now.

Bofferbrauer2 said:
I'd say 2021

With the hardware flaws in the Tegra chips I'm sure Nintendo asks NVidia to iron these out first, and as a result should recieve a true custom Tegra chip

My expectation is somewhere around this:

TSMC 7nm process (Nintendo tends to use an older, proven process and hardware, by that time 7nm and what I write below hopefully fits that bill to them)
4-6 Cortex A75 CPU @ 1.5-1.7 Ghz
384 Turing Cuda Cores @400 (Handheld)-800Ghz (Docked) or 256 Pascal Cuda Cores @600-1200Ghz
8GB LPDDR4-2666, 128bit connection (the LP variant isn't specified higher than that, sadly)
128GB Flash Memory
5000-6000 mAh internal battery

In 7nm, a configuration close to that should get close to XBO S power in docked mode and slightly more powerful in handheld mode than the docked mode now without consuming more, and the stronger battery allows for longer game sessions in handheld mode.

Doubt it. The costs would be pretty big for a revision like that. I think Nintendo will just continue to use off the shelf components. Aka. Pascal.

Besides... The RAM will blow the costs out, Turing Cores isn't going to happen.
I also think you meant Mhz, not Ghz.
7nm will also be fairly expensive compared to a much more mature 16/14/12nm process, especially as capacity is freed up on those nodes as AMD/Intel/nVidia/Apple/Qualcomm etc' move to newer nodes.

Now if they intend to make a "premium" console along the lines of the Playstation 4 Pro/Xbox One X where cost isn't going to be a big factor, then sure. But Turing is still unlikely to happen.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Sure, an Tegra X2 could do the trick, but considering the inherent massive flaws in the chips (just google Spectre and Meltdown) I'm damn sure Nintendo will want new hardware with those flaws eliminated, something that takes a lot of time to implement. Late 2020 is therefore the earliest possible unless Nintendo really accepts the X2 "as is" for a Switch hardware upgrade

The flaws can be mitigated to a certain degree.
Really depends how many resources Nintendo wants to throw at the problem.




--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said: 
Bofferbrauer2 said:
I'd say 2021

With the hardware flaws in the Tegra chips I'm sure Nintendo asks NVidia to iron these out first, and as a result should recieve a true custom Tegra chip

My expectation is somewhere around this:

TSMC 7nm process (Nintendo tends to use an older, proven process and hardware, by that time 7nm and what I write below hopefully fits that bill to them)
4-6 Cortex A75 CPU @ 1.5-1.7 Ghz
384 Turing Cuda Cores @400 (Handheld)-800Ghz (Docked) or 256 Pascal Cuda Cores @600-1200Ghz
8GB LPDDR4-2666, 128bit connection (the LP variant isn't specified higher than that, sadly)
128GB Flash Memory
5000-6000 mAh internal battery

In 7nm, a configuration close to that should get close to XBO S power in docked mode and slightly more powerful in handheld mode than the docked mode now without consuming more, and the stronger battery allows for longer game sessions in handheld mode.

Doubt it. The costs would be pretty big for a revision like that. I think Nintendo will just continue to use off the shelf components. Aka. Pascal.

Besides... The RAM will blow the costs out, Turing Cores isn't going to happen.
I also think you meant Mhz, not Ghz.
7nm will also be fairly expensive compared to a much more mature 16/14/12nm process, especially as capacity is freed up on those nodes as AMD/Intel/nVidia/Apple/Qualcomm etc' move to newer nodes.

Now if they intend to make a "premium" console along the lines of the Playstation 4 Pro/Xbox One X where cost isn't going to be a big factor, then sure. But Turing is still unlikely to happen.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Sure, an Tegra X2 could do the trick, but considering the inherent massive flaws in the chips (just google Spectre and Meltdown) I'm damn sure Nintendo will want new hardware with those flaws eliminated, something that takes a lot of time to implement. Late 2020 is therefore the earliest possible unless Nintendo really accepts the X2 "as is" for a Switch hardware upgrade

The flaws can be mitigated to a certain degree.
Really depends how many resources Nintendo wants to throw at the problem.


The flaws can be mitigated, but it would cost the X2 so much power it wouldn't be much of an upgrade anymore, hence why I went with a custom chip. In 7nm, that chip shouldn't be any bigger than the X1 in the Switch, which is produced in 28nm, which means production costs would be about the same. Keep in mind I said 2021, by then the 7nm process should have matured enough, though there's still the possibility of a 10/12nm process (16/14nm would just be too outdated by then even by Nintendo standards imo).

RAM prices are falling again, and by 2021, DDR5 should be arriving. So I doubt 8GiB DDR4 by then would be more expensive than 4GiB when the Switch launched. While I didn't precise it here (I did so before in another thread), that upgraded Switch+ would be released at the same 299$ pricetag as the original Switch in my book.

And yeah, I meant Mhz. Muscle Memory, I suppose.



Bofferbrauer2 said:

In 7nm, that chip shouldn't be any bigger than the X1 in the Switch, which is produced in 28nm, which means production costs would be about the same.

A chip built at 7nm and a chip built at 14/16nm that is the exact same physical size? It will be cheaper to manufacture on 14/16nm.
Wafer costs go up every time you shrink.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Keep in mind I said 2021, by then the 7nm process should have matured enough, though there's still the possibility of a 10/12nm process (16/14nm would just be too outdated by then even by Nintendo standards imo).

I think you might have fallen for the advertising ploy that is "nm" naming these days.
Whilst 12nm does have inherent advantages over 14nm at say... Global Foundries... 12nm is just a refined 14nm process, which in turn is a refined 20nm process.

At-least Samsung and TSMC changed their BEOL.
You are looking at probbal 10-15% gains going from 14nm to 12nm at most... And I think I am being generous there.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

RAM prices are falling again, and by 2021, DDR5 should be arriving.

DDR5 doesn't equate to LPDDR5.
Ram prices may also increase by 2021... You only need a couple of factories to be taken offline from a weather event.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

 So I doubt 8GiB DDR4 by then would be more expensive than 4GiB when the Switch launched. While I didn't precise it here (I did so before in another thread), that upgraded Switch+ would be released at the same 299$ pricetag as the original Switch in my book.

I was more or less pointing at the memory speed on a 128bit bus in conjunction with a doubling of DRAM.

You can have the Ram run at the same clockrate/Mhz as the current Switch and you would still more than double your bandwidth, so it doesn't make sense to drive up the memory controller which consumes power when you have already made massive bandwidth gains.
Or, Nintendo might opt for higher clocked memory but a smaller bus which brings with it a ton of cost-benefits like a simper memory controller, less PCB traces and thus layers, simpler power delivery... You know. The usual.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

In 7nm, that chip shouldn't be any bigger than the X1 in the Switch, which is produced in 28nm, which means production costs would be about the same.

A chip built at 7nm and a chip built at 14/16nm that is the exact same physical size? It will be cheaper to manufacture on 14/16nm.
Wafer costs go up every time you shrink
.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Keep in mind I said 2021, by then the 7nm process should have matured enough, though there's still the possibility of a 10/12nm process (16/14nm would just be too outdated by then even by Nintendo standards imo).

I think you might have fallen for the advertising ploy that is "nm" naming these days.
Whilst 12nm does have inherent advantages over 14nm at say... Global Foundries... 12nm is just a refined 14nm process, which in turn is a refined 20nm process
.

At-least Samsung and TSMC changed their BEOL.
You are looking at probbal 10-15% gains going from 14nm to 12nm at most... And I think I am being generous there.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

RAM prices are falling again, and by 2021, DDR5 should be arriving.

DDR5 doesn't equate to LPDDR5.
Ram prices may also increase by 2021... You only need a couple of factories to be taken offline from a weather event
.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

 So I doubt 8GiB DDR4 by then would be more expensive than 4GiB when the Switch launched. While I didn't precise it here (I did so before in another thread), that upgraded Switch+ would be released at the same 299$ pricetag as the original Switch in my book.

I was more or less pointing at the memory speed on a 128bit bus in conjunction with a doubling of DRAM.

You can have the Ram run at the same clockrate/Mhz as the current Switch and you would still more than double your bandwidth, so it doesn't make sense to drive up the memory controller which consumes power when you have already made massive bandwidth gains.

Or, Nintendo might opt for higher clocked memory but a smaller bus which brings with it a ton of cost-benefits like a simper memory controller, less PCB traces and thus layers, simpler power delivery... You know. The usual.

@bolded: That's why I said about the same, not exactly the same. Sure, the 7nm will be more expensive, but not by much.

@italic: Nope, more like the original meanings, like 16nm and 12nm being the full nodes while 14nm and 10nm being half nodes. GF calling their upgraded 14nm a 12nm process was pretty awkward for me in that regard.

That said, I don't remember seeing any ARM chip being produced in any 12nm process, they all seemed to go straight to a 10nm process. I doubt anything else than Ryzen+ will be produced in that process either.

@underscored: I don't expect DDR5 in any Switch revision. Just wanted to point out with this that when CPU transition to another RAM standard, the old standard generally drops markedly in price. Hence why I followed it with saying that by then 8GiB DDR4 shouldn't be more expensive then compared to the 4GiB when the Switch launched.

@bolded and italic: I have a feeling that the bandwith is already a bottleneck on the Switch, hence why I wanted to widen it more than the increase in GPU processing power. Switch corrently is only using LPDDR4-1600, resulting in measly 25.6 GB/s bandwith. I agree that going all the way to LPDDR4-2666 while also doubling the channel with to 128 bit is probably overkill (LPDDR4-2133 would probably suffice), but 83 GB/s would certainly be a safer bet for no bandwith choking than just going 128bit and keeping the LPDDR4-1600



Bofferbrauer2 said:
Pemalite said:

A chip built at 7nm and a chip built at 14/16nm that is the exact same physical size? It will be cheaper to manufacture on 14/16nm.
Wafer costs go up every time you shrink
.

@bolded: That's why I said about the same, not exactly the same. Sure, the 7nm will be more expensive, but not by much.

Nope. 7nm will be more expensive, it's actually been a trend for a long time now. It will take a couple years for TSMC/Samsungs 7nm to be price competitive.


Global Foundries is even stepping away from 7nm entirely... Meaning less capacity and competition at that node than say... 14/16nm.
https://www.anandtech.com/comments/13277/globalfoundries-stops-all-7nm-development

But in terms of fabrication... The bulk of IC's are 55nm and larger, with production of chips between 90nm and 180nm being 27% of the semiconductor market.


Bofferbrauer2 said:

@italic: Nope, more like the original meanings, like 16nm and 12nm being the full nodes while 14nm and 10nm being half nodes. GF calling their upgraded 14nm a 12nm process was pretty awkward for me in that regard.
That said, I don't remember seeing any ARM chip being produced in any 12nm process, they all seemed to go straight to a 10nm process. I doubt anything else than Ryzen+ will be produced in that process either.

12nm is an extension of 14nm anyway... It was made that way to allow easy porting of 14/16nm chips.

The point I am trying to convey is that "nm" isn't actually representing an accurate geometrical size of shrinks.
I.E. Intels 10nm is actually in many aspects superior to TSMC's 7nm.

Ryzen is a large and profitable chip for AMD, so they can get away using a leading manufacturing processes.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

I don't expect DDR5 in any Switch revision. Just wanted to point out with this that when CPU transition to another RAM standard, the old standard generally drops markedly in price. Hence why I followed it with saying that by then 8GiB DDR4 shouldn't be more expensive then compared to the 4GiB when the Switch launched.

All I am saying is that Ram is a commodity price so it will fluctuate wildly. 16GB of DDR4 for example today is more expensive than 32GB of DDR3 Ram I bought 8 years ago.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

I have a feeling that the bandwith is already a bottleneck on the Switch, hence why I wanted to widen it more than the increase in GPU processing power.

That is because the lack of bandwidth is a bottleneck on the Switch, the bandwidth it has is generally not doing it any favors at 1080P.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Switch corrently is only using LPDDR4-1600, resulting in measly 25.6 GB/s bandwith. I agree that going all the way to LPDDR4-2666 while also doubling the channel with to 128 bit is probably overkill (LPDDR4-2133 would probably suffice), but 83 GB/s would certainly be a safer bet for no bandwith choking than just going 128bit and keeping the LPDDR4-1600

You are only looking at the raw bandwidth numbers.
The Switch actually has more available bandwidth than that.

In general... 50GB/s would probably be a good spot to be, it's roughly how much the Geforce 1030 has, which is a decent chip for 720P gaming. - Also find it not to be Bandwidth constrained either from when I did some overclocking testing.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--